The former wife of a Russian oligarch has won a divorce payout of £12.5
million after a judge ruled the postnuptial agreement she signed was "grossly
unfair".

A High Court judge ruled that Janna Kremen's claims for a £2 million housing fund and annual income of £420,000 a year for two of their three sons were "reasonable needs" after dismissing her postnuptial agreement as "highly disadvantageous".

Miss Kremen, 44, signed the "sham" deal with her former husband Boris Agrest after the pair had been married for 10 years. It limited her claim to his £20-30 million fortune to around £970,000 ($1.5 million).

She launched her legal battle after Mr Agrest, a financier, vowed to leave her and their three sons "destitute" when their marriage disintegrated in 2007.

Post-nuptial agreements are marital contracts agreed after a couple have been married and sets out how their assets will be divided if they divorce.

The agreements are legally enforceable in Britain but judges have the discretion to ignore them if the terms are unfair to either side, or if one partner abused their powerful position to draw them up.

Related Articles

The court heard he refused to pay the £34,000-a-year fees for their 14-year-old son Victor to attend Charterhouse school in London, and the £14,000 fees for seven-year-old Maxim's prep school. Their third son, Genadis, 20, is at university in New York.

Mr Agrest, 51, also claimed their marriage in 1991 was not valid as well as telling the court he had "no assets whatsoever" and earned just £150 a month.

During the case, it emerged Mr Agrest had moved out of the couple's £4 million home in Weybridge, Surrey, to another nearby £3 million estate with a 19-year-old woman.

Awarding Miss Kremen the £12.5 million lump sum, Mr Justice Mostyn said: "For reasons to do with asset protection, Mr Agrest decided to prevail on his wife to enter into a marital agreement that was highly disadvantageous to her.

"An agreement which only gave the wife $1.5 million out of a huge fortune accumulated during the marriage is likely to be unfair ... The wife did not enter into the agreement with a full appreciation of its implications.

"It would be grossly unfair to hold the wife to an agreement which deprived her of her fair share of a fortune, to the formation of which she has in her own way equally contributed.

"Moreover the agreement did not then, nor does it now, remotely meet her reasonable needs, and the agreement grossly prejudices the needs of the children."

Miss Kremen, who lives with her sons in a two-bedroom flat in Hersham, Surrey, was awarded £8.3 million in maintenance and a £4.2 million share of the joint fortune.

But the judge warned she would struggle to see the settlement paid beyond the £1 million of her husband's assets held in the UK.

Julian Hawkhead, managing partner of Stowe Family Law, said: "Post-nuptial agreements are not particularly common. Perhaps people consider that it is too late to determine how to arrange their financial affairs after they are married.

"As with prenups, certain pre-requirements ought to be met including the provision of full financial disclosure, no undue pressure on the parties to enter into the agreement and the opportunity to take legal advice."